The Oyez Project Virtual Tour of the Supreme Court Building

Abstract

Argument: Monday, March 17, 1997
Decision: Thursday, June 19, 1997
Issues: Economic Activity, Election of Remedies

Advocates

Robert E. Babcock ()
Thomas J. Pierry ()
Malcolm L. Stewart ()

Facts of the Case

John Rambo received a disability award under the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (LHWCA) for an injury he sustained while working for the Metropolitan Stevedore Company as a longshore frontman. Afterwards, Rambo acquired new skills and obtained longshore work as a crane operator, earning more than three times his preinjury earnings, though his disabled physical condition remained unchanged. Metropolitan then filed to modify Rambo's disability award under the LHWCA. An Administrative Law judge terminated Rambo's benefits because of his increased earnings. The Benefits Review Board affirmed. In reversing, the Court of Appeals held that the LHWCA only authorizes disability award modifications if there has been a change in an employee's physical condition. Later the appellate court reversed another order discontinuing compensation.

Question

Does the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act bar nominal compensation to a worker who is presently able to earn at least as much as before he was injured?

Conclusion

No. In a 6-3 opinion delivered by Justice David H. Souter, the Court held that nominal compensation is proper when there is a significant possibility that the worker's wage-earning capacity will fall below the level of his pre-injury wages sometime in the future. The Court reasoned that a worker is entitled to nominal compensation under the LHWCA when a work-related injury has not diminished the worker's present wage-earning capacity under current circumstances, but when there is a significant possibility that the injury will cause diminished capacity under future conditions. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote a dissenting opinion in which she was joined by Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

Supreme Court Justice Opinions and Votes (by Seniority)

Sort by Ideology
(More information here)
Decision: 6 votes for Rambo, 3 vote(s) against
Legal Provision: Longshoremen and Harbor Workers' Compensation
Voted with the majority
Rehnquist
Voted with the majority
Stevens
Wrote a dissent
O'Connor
Voted with the minority, joined O'Connor's dissent
Scalia
Voted with the majority
Kennedy
Wrote the majority opinion
Souter
Voted with the minority, joined O'Connor's dissent
Thomas
Voted with the majority
Ginsburg
Voted with the majority
Breyer
Full Opinion by Justice David H. Souter

Cite this page

The Oyez Project, Metropolitan Stevedore Co. v. Rambo, 521 U.S. 121 (1997),
available at: <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1996/1996_96_272/>
(last visited ).